add_clip_notes

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behaviors. It reveals the additive nature and non-destructive behavior, which is key. However, it does not mention potential side effects, prerequisites (e.g., clip must exist and be MIDI), or error handling, leaving some behavioral gaps.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two sentences: first states purpose and key differentiator, second lists parameter details. No fluff, information is front-loaded and efficiently conveyed.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given the presence of sibling tools like set_clip_notes and remove_clip_notes, the description covers the essential behavior and differentiator. It lacks details on return values (but output schema exists) and error conditions, but overall is sufficient for correct tool selection and usage in most contexts.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 0%, so the description must compensate. It explains the 'notes' parameter structure (list of dicts with pitch, start_time, duration, velocity, mute), but does not describe 'clip_index' or 'track_index', which are self-explanatory but still undocumented. Partial compensation.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the tool adds MIDI notes to a clip and explicitly distinguishes it from set_clip_notes by noting it does not delete existing notes. Verb 'add' and resource 'clip notes' are specific and leave no ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides explicit guidance by contrasting with set_clip_notes ('does NOT delete existing notes, unlike set_clip_notes'), helping the agent decide which tool to use. It does not cover other alternatives or exclusions, but the single distinction is clear enough.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.